tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7245208048685880741.post1608826739505519144..comments2023-05-19T10:32:11.137-04:00Comments on Rational Expressions: 7 Best, 5 WorstMichael Pershanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7245208048685880741.post-63985996930764424532013-05-20T13:40:51.767-04:002013-05-20T13:40:51.767-04:00For Worst #4, I think it can be done. I'll giv...For Worst #4, I think it can be done. I'll give it a go early next year with less text and more practice problems with numbers only. Day 2, they'll make their own "function".<br /><br />Well done, discussing mistakes and areas for improvement. A post in that direction is coming soon.Matt Vaudreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00293642878847593062noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7245208048685880741.post-1385551300976092752012-12-18T08:19:09.025-05:002012-12-18T08:19:09.025-05:00Welcome to the human race, eh?Welcome to the human race, eh?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7245208048685880741.post-37705743058389397352012-12-15T18:55:28.465-05:002012-12-15T18:55:28.465-05:00Damn. Teacher mistake. That's embarrassing.Damn. Teacher mistake. That's embarrassing. Michael Pershanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17046644130957574890noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7245208048685880741.post-89954130347108120992012-12-15T12:52:10.088-05:002012-12-15T12:52:10.088-05:00Though I'm not a math teacher, just a wanna be...Though I'm not a math teacher, just a wanna be mathematician who does some tutoring on the side, I thoroughly enjoy this blog. However, this post has me scratching my head on one point. On #1 of the good, I see the student calculating 3^-3 and obtaining 1/9. If I'm reading things right, the answer was marked as correct. However, unless I'm just too fuzzy on a Saturday morning after a long week, 3^-3 = 1/27. The student's process was certainly correct, but 3^3 = 27, not 9. Am I missing something or reading it wrong?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7245208048685880741.post-62917092913293386002012-12-04T20:29:49.671-05:002012-12-04T20:29:49.671-05:00That was clever, tying the multiplicative inverse ...That was clever, tying the multiplicative inverse into inverse functions. I've always felt the notation to be more confusing than anything, particularly once it's associated with trigonometry. There it seems to work. Very nice. Hopefully I remember to (or rather, find the time to) do something similar when I'm redoing things next semester.<br /><br />In terms of graphing inverse functions, what was the so-called "fluke"? Maybe if you approach it from the perspective of what's similar about functions which act as their own inverse as being "cool"? (Any line with slope -1 for instance.) Not that I've done that; I tend to build the graphs off of the fact that domain and range get swapped, so what does that imply... which seems more specific as compared to how you do things. (There's far too much material to get through in the Gr 11 U-course...)<br /><br />As far as the soapbox goes, I haven't posted up individual good and bad lessons, though last month I did a few generics in terms of a positive roundup: http://mathiex.blogspot.ca/2012/11/math-teaching-roundup-part-1.html<br />And negative roundup: http://mathiex.blogspot.ca/2012/11/math-teaching-roundup-part-2.html<br /><br />There WAS a pretty good Exponents lesson as part of Day 1 of my DITLife, followed by some screwups in another class on Day 2, same blog channel, different blog times. Everything else is random...Gregory Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06547180132612659893noreply@blogger.com